Design, analysis, and reporting of pilot and feasibility trials in anesthesiology: a methodological study
Abstract Background Pilot and feasibility studies are effective tools for assessing the feasibility of performing larger-scale studies. These are particularly useful in anesthesiology, where the research overlaps with several other medical and surgical fields. The objective of this meta-epidemiologi...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2025-05-01
|
| Series: | Pilot and Feasibility Studies |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-025-01655-z |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849731903105531904 |
|---|---|
| author | Tariq Atkin-Jones Mohamed Ali Akudo C. J. Eze-Onuorah Ezinne Ifeanacho Azin Khosravirad Kim Madden Behnam Sadeghirad Lawrence Mbuagbaw |
| author_facet | Tariq Atkin-Jones Mohamed Ali Akudo C. J. Eze-Onuorah Ezinne Ifeanacho Azin Khosravirad Kim Madden Behnam Sadeghirad Lawrence Mbuagbaw |
| author_sort | Tariq Atkin-Jones |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Pilot and feasibility studies are effective tools for assessing the feasibility of performing larger-scale studies. These are particularly useful in anesthesiology, where the research overlaps with several other medical and surgical fields. The objective of this meta-epidemiological study is to assess the design and methodology of pilot and feasibility randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in anesthesiology. Methods We searched for pilot and feasibility RCTs in anesthesiology indexed in PubMed during a 5-year span between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2022. We extracted bibliographic information, field of study, type of intervention, trial duration, trial design, use of qualitative data, use of progression criteria, whether the primary objective and primary outcome were related to feasibility, reported feasibility outcomes, and sample size justification. We conducted logistic regression to determine the factors associated with using progression criteria, having primary feasibility outcomes, and using feasibility outcomes to justify the sample size. We controlled for publication year, journal impact factor, source of funding, intervention type, and region. Results Our search retrieved 3015 trials, of which 248 were ultimately included and analyzed. Less than a third of studies stated feasibility as the primary objective (n = 77, 31.0%). Feasibility was a primary outcome in 46 (18.6%) studies, progression criteria were used in 27 (10.9%) studies, a sample size justification was listed in 134 (54.0%) studies, and 24 (9.7%) studies used qualitative data. We did not find any statistically significant association between progression criteria and any of the selected variables. Recently published trials had higher odds of having primary feasibility outcomes (odds ratio [OR] 1.39; 95% CI 1.06–1.83). Studies of pharmacological interventions had lower odds primary feasibility outcomes (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19–0.90). Recent studies also had higher odds of having a sample size justification based on a feasibility outcome rather than a clinical outcome or similar studies (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.06–2.15). Conclusions More recently published pilot RCTs were significantly associated with having a primary feasibility outcome and determining sample size based on feasibility, while pharmacological studies were significantly associated with less reporting of primary feasibility outcomes. Future research addressing the factors limiting adherence to current guidelines is warranted. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-fb44f9a8ddd442189adfb451d9c24863 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2055-5784 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-05-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Pilot and Feasibility Studies |
| spelling | doaj-art-fb44f9a8ddd442189adfb451d9c248632025-08-20T03:08:24ZengBMCPilot and Feasibility Studies2055-57842025-05-011111710.1186/s40814-025-01655-zDesign, analysis, and reporting of pilot and feasibility trials in anesthesiology: a methodological studyTariq Atkin-Jones0Mohamed Ali1Akudo C. J. Eze-Onuorah2Ezinne Ifeanacho3Azin Khosravirad4Kim Madden5Behnam Sadeghirad6Lawrence Mbuagbaw7Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster UniversityMichael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster UniversityFaculty of Health Sciences, McMaster UniversityFaculty of Health Sciences, McMaster UniversityDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster UniversityDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster UniversityDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster UniversityDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster UniversityAbstract Background Pilot and feasibility studies are effective tools for assessing the feasibility of performing larger-scale studies. These are particularly useful in anesthesiology, where the research overlaps with several other medical and surgical fields. The objective of this meta-epidemiological study is to assess the design and methodology of pilot and feasibility randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in anesthesiology. Methods We searched for pilot and feasibility RCTs in anesthesiology indexed in PubMed during a 5-year span between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2022. We extracted bibliographic information, field of study, type of intervention, trial duration, trial design, use of qualitative data, use of progression criteria, whether the primary objective and primary outcome were related to feasibility, reported feasibility outcomes, and sample size justification. We conducted logistic regression to determine the factors associated with using progression criteria, having primary feasibility outcomes, and using feasibility outcomes to justify the sample size. We controlled for publication year, journal impact factor, source of funding, intervention type, and region. Results Our search retrieved 3015 trials, of which 248 were ultimately included and analyzed. Less than a third of studies stated feasibility as the primary objective (n = 77, 31.0%). Feasibility was a primary outcome in 46 (18.6%) studies, progression criteria were used in 27 (10.9%) studies, a sample size justification was listed in 134 (54.0%) studies, and 24 (9.7%) studies used qualitative data. We did not find any statistically significant association between progression criteria and any of the selected variables. Recently published trials had higher odds of having primary feasibility outcomes (odds ratio [OR] 1.39; 95% CI 1.06–1.83). Studies of pharmacological interventions had lower odds primary feasibility outcomes (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19–0.90). Recent studies also had higher odds of having a sample size justification based on a feasibility outcome rather than a clinical outcome or similar studies (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.06–2.15). Conclusions More recently published pilot RCTs were significantly associated with having a primary feasibility outcome and determining sample size based on feasibility, while pharmacological studies were significantly associated with less reporting of primary feasibility outcomes. Future research addressing the factors limiting adherence to current guidelines is warranted.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-025-01655-zPilotFeasibilityRCTFeasibility outcomeProgression criteriaQualitative data |
| spellingShingle | Tariq Atkin-Jones Mohamed Ali Akudo C. J. Eze-Onuorah Ezinne Ifeanacho Azin Khosravirad Kim Madden Behnam Sadeghirad Lawrence Mbuagbaw Design, analysis, and reporting of pilot and feasibility trials in anesthesiology: a methodological study Pilot and Feasibility Studies Pilot Feasibility RCT Feasibility outcome Progression criteria Qualitative data |
| title | Design, analysis, and reporting of pilot and feasibility trials in anesthesiology: a methodological study |
| title_full | Design, analysis, and reporting of pilot and feasibility trials in anesthesiology: a methodological study |
| title_fullStr | Design, analysis, and reporting of pilot and feasibility trials in anesthesiology: a methodological study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Design, analysis, and reporting of pilot and feasibility trials in anesthesiology: a methodological study |
| title_short | Design, analysis, and reporting of pilot and feasibility trials in anesthesiology: a methodological study |
| title_sort | design analysis and reporting of pilot and feasibility trials in anesthesiology a methodological study |
| topic | Pilot Feasibility RCT Feasibility outcome Progression criteria Qualitative data |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-025-01655-z |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT tariqatkinjones designanalysisandreportingofpilotandfeasibilitytrialsinanesthesiologyamethodologicalstudy AT mohamedali designanalysisandreportingofpilotandfeasibilitytrialsinanesthesiologyamethodologicalstudy AT akudocjezeonuorah designanalysisandreportingofpilotandfeasibilitytrialsinanesthesiologyamethodologicalstudy AT ezinneifeanacho designanalysisandreportingofpilotandfeasibilitytrialsinanesthesiologyamethodologicalstudy AT azinkhosravirad designanalysisandreportingofpilotandfeasibilitytrialsinanesthesiologyamethodologicalstudy AT kimmadden designanalysisandreportingofpilotandfeasibilitytrialsinanesthesiologyamethodologicalstudy AT behnamsadeghirad designanalysisandreportingofpilotandfeasibilitytrialsinanesthesiologyamethodologicalstudy AT lawrencembuagbaw designanalysisandreportingofpilotandfeasibilitytrialsinanesthesiologyamethodologicalstudy |